Originally Posted by
blutoski
To punitively tax this 110 year old woodframe house on a 33' x 120' lot as 'wealth' seems unfair to me.
But other than that yeah, the research shows there's possibly some merit in taxing wealth instead of income, especially where equities are involved, because they do represent power as well as just standard of living.
In the US, tax rates differentiate between is known as a "primary residence" and other real-estate; and a well-constructed wealth tax would take that into account. So the blue-collar worker who inherits a family house who value has increased dramatically due to circumstances outside of his control would not suffer an undue tax burden on that house; but if he happened to also have a vacation house in the mountains, or a summer house down South Beach way, those could see a much higher tax burden.